Gnaiger 2024 MitoFit: Difference between revisions
Tindle Lisa (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|journal=MitoFit Prep | |journal=MitoFit Prep | ||
|abstract=Effective science communication is vital for research integrity. However, ambiguities in scientific language obscure comprehension and diminish publication quality, akin to irreproducibility. Established ambiguous terms misguide even graphical representations of scientific knowledge. For instance, ‘electron transport chain’ misrepresents the electron transfer system. Electron transfer to the Q-junction converges from branched pathways rather than following a ''chain'' of respiratory Complexes. Complex I catalyzes H<sup>+</sup>-linked electron ''transfer'' from NADH, coupled to vectorial H<sup>+</sup>-''transport'' across the coupling membrane. Analogous to NADH for Complex I, succinate but not FADH<sub>2</sub> is the substrate of Complex II. Confusion between respiratory state 2 and LEAK states, or state 3 and OXPHOS capacity impedes accurate interpretation, as does imprecise usage of uncoupled, noncoupled, or dyscoupled respiration. In the context of the vague concepts of oxidative stress and normoxia, intracellular oxygen pressure warrants attention. Beyond gas pressure, force-pressure ambiguities penetrate thermodynamics. Protonmotive pressure builds bridges to kinetics and explains the enigmatic nonlinearity between protonmotive force and proton leak flux. Please, distinguish Gibbs force from Gibbs energy. Different meanings of entropy in closed and open systems fuel contentious debates surrounding negative entropy, involving a number of prominent figures such as Erwin Schrödinger, Linus Pauling, and Max Perutz. Even the International System of Units (SI) intertwines the fundamental terms unit, count, and number. Resolving ambiguities is crucial for scientific accuracy, to counter misinformation and enhance quality in publications. Clarifying terminology in bioenergetics and thermodynamics thus becomes pivotal towards advancing knowledge and fostering informed discourse within the scientific community and beyond.<br> | |abstract=Effective science communication is vital for research integrity. However, ambiguities in scientific language obscure comprehension and diminish publication quality, akin to irreproducibility. Established ambiguous terms misguide even graphical representations of scientific knowledge. For instance, ‘electron transport chain’ misrepresents the electron transfer system. Electron transfer to the Q-junction converges from branched pathways rather than following a ''chain'' of respiratory Complexes. Complex I catalyzes H<sup>+</sup>-linked electron ''transfer'' from NADH, coupled to vectorial H<sup>+</sup>-''transport'' across the coupling membrane. Analogous to NADH for Complex I, succinate but not FADH<sub>2</sub> is the substrate of Complex II. Confusion between respiratory state 2 and LEAK states, or state 3 and OXPHOS capacity impedes accurate interpretation, as does imprecise usage of uncoupled, noncoupled, or dyscoupled respiration. In the context of the vague concepts of oxidative stress and normoxia, intracellular oxygen pressure warrants attention. Beyond gas pressure, force-pressure ambiguities penetrate thermodynamics. Protonmotive pressure builds bridges to kinetics and explains the enigmatic nonlinearity between protonmotive force and proton leak flux. Please, distinguish Gibbs force from Gibbs energy. Different meanings of entropy in closed and open systems fuel contentious debates surrounding negative entropy, involving a number of prominent figures such as Erwin Schrödinger, Linus Pauling, and Max Perutz. Even the International System of Units (SI) intertwines the fundamental terms unit, count, and number. Resolving ambiguities is crucial for scientific accuracy, to counter misinformation and enhance quality in publications. Clarifying terminology in bioenergetics and thermodynamics thus becomes pivotal towards advancing knowledge and fostering informed discourse within the scientific community and beyond.<br> | ||
|keywords=Ambiguity, Complex II, count, entropy production, electron transfer system, Gibbs energy, Gibbs force, hypoxia, oxidative stress, OXPHOS coupling, protonmotive force | |||
|keywords=Ambiguity, Complex II, count, entropy production, electron transfer system, Gibbs energy, Gibbs force, hypoxia, oxidative stress, OXPHOS coupling, protonmotive force | |||
|editor=[[Tindle-Solomon L]] | |editor=[[Tindle-Solomon L]] | ||
|mipnetlab=AT Innsbruck Oroboros | |mipnetlab=AT Innsbruck Oroboros | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Labeling | {{Labeling | ||
|area= | |area=Respiration, mt-Awareness | ||
|topics= | |injuries=Oxidative stress;RONS, Hypoxia | ||
|couplingstates= | |topics=Coupling efficiency;uncoupling | ||
|couplingstates=LEAK, OXPHOS, ET | |||
|pathways=NS | |||
|instruments=Theory | |||
|additional=Protonmotive force, Pressure, Force, Number, Count, Unit, Ambiguity crisis | |||
}} | }} | ||
ORC'''ID''': [[File:ORCID.png|20px|link=https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3647-5895]] Gnaiger Erich | |||
Revision as of 21:50, 30 April 2024
| Gnaiger E (2024) Addressing the ambiguity crisis in bioenergetics and thermodynamics. MitoFit Preprints 2024.3. https://doi.org/10.26124/mitofit:2024-0003 |
» MitoFit Preprints 2024.3.
Addressing the ambiguity crisis in bioenergetics and thermodynamics.
Gnaiger Erich (2024) MitoFit Prep
Abstract: Effective science communication is vital for research integrity. However, ambiguities in scientific language obscure comprehension and diminish publication quality, akin to irreproducibility. Established ambiguous terms misguide even graphical representations of scientific knowledge. For instance, ‘electron transport chain’ misrepresents the electron transfer system. Electron transfer to the Q-junction converges from branched pathways rather than following a chain of respiratory Complexes. Complex I catalyzes H+-linked electron transfer from NADH, coupled to vectorial H+-transport across the coupling membrane. Analogous to NADH for Complex I, succinate but not FADH2 is the substrate of Complex II. Confusion between respiratory state 2 and LEAK states, or state 3 and OXPHOS capacity impedes accurate interpretation, as does imprecise usage of uncoupled, noncoupled, or dyscoupled respiration. In the context of the vague concepts of oxidative stress and normoxia, intracellular oxygen pressure warrants attention. Beyond gas pressure, force-pressure ambiguities penetrate thermodynamics. Protonmotive pressure builds bridges to kinetics and explains the enigmatic nonlinearity between protonmotive force and proton leak flux. Please, distinguish Gibbs force from Gibbs energy. Different meanings of entropy in closed and open systems fuel contentious debates surrounding negative entropy, involving a number of prominent figures such as Erwin Schrödinger, Linus Pauling, and Max Perutz. Even the International System of Units (SI) intertwines the fundamental terms unit, count, and number. Resolving ambiguities is crucial for scientific accuracy, to counter misinformation and enhance quality in publications. Clarifying terminology in bioenergetics and thermodynamics thus becomes pivotal towards advancing knowledge and fostering informed discourse within the scientific community and beyond.
• Keywords: Ambiguity, Complex II, count, entropy production, electron transfer system, Gibbs energy, Gibbs force, hypoxia, oxidative stress, OXPHOS coupling, protonmotive force
• Bioblast editor: Tindle-Solomon L
• O2k-Network Lab: AT Innsbruck Oroboros
Labels: MiParea: Respiration, mt-Awareness
Stress:Oxidative stress;RONS, Hypoxia
Regulation: Coupling efficiency;uncoupling
Coupling state: LEAK, OXPHOS, ET
Pathway: NS
HRR: Theory
Protonmotive force, Pressure, Force, Number, Count, Unit, Ambiguity crisis
ORCID: 
Gnaiger Erich
